Abstract
Purpose
China has proposed the carbon emission target in 2020, and timber building is one of the solutions to reduce carbon emission in building sector. This study conducts a comparative study to quantitative analysis of the decarbonization potential of timber buildings from a life cycle perspective.
Methods
Seven representative demonstration projects with a timber structure in China were selected as research objects. The materials inventory was collected. Based on China’s national standard Standard for Building Carbon Emission Calculation (GB/T51366-2019), the life cycle carbon emissions from all 5 stages, including production, transportation, construction, operation, and demolition stages, are calculated. The assessment results are compared to ordinary reinforced concrete buildings and ultra-low energy buildings.
Results and discussion
The findings indicated that carbon emissions in the operation stage of buildings accounted for an average of 87.7% of carbon emission in the total life-cycle of buildings. Compared to ordinary buildings made of reinforced concrete, timber buildings can reduce carbon emissions in the production stage by 64.5%. Therefore, from a life-cycle perspective, 11.0% of carbon emissions can be saved. By upgrading energy efficiency to ultra-low energy buildings, although the carbon emission from building material may increase by 28.5%, the carbon emission is significantly reduced by 39.3% during the operation stage, with a 32.7% reduction for the life cycle.
Conclusions
This study provides a life cycle assessment of carbon emission of 7 timber buildings in China. The timber buildings only contribute to the decarbonization for the production stage. Around 11.0% of carbon emissions can be saved for timber structures. Meanwhile, 32.7% more carbon emissions can be saved by upgrading the energy efficiency to ultra-low energy buildings. This study also shows LCA is an effective tool for evaluating the contributions of different aspects and to ensure the achievement of carbon emission targets.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Adalberth K (1997) Energy use during thel ife cycle of buildings :a method. Build Environ 4:317–320
Adam BR, Frank CFL, Raymond JC (2012) A comparative cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of mid-rise office building construction alternatives: Laminated timber or reinforced concrete. Buildings 2:245–270
Anand CK, Amor B (2017) Recent developments, future challenges and new research directions in LCA of buildings: A critical review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev. 67:408–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.058
AthenaSMI (2013) A cradle-to-gate LCA of Canadian cross laminated timber (CLT)
AthenaSMI (2015a) Wood innovation and design center—an environmental building declaration according to the EN 15978 Standard
AthenaSMI (2015b) Wood Innovation and Design Centre, Prince George, BC—an environmental building declaration according to the EN 15978 Standard. Athena Sustainable Materials Institute, Ottawa, Ontario
AthenaSMI (2018a) Brock Commons Tallwood House, University of British Columbia—an environmental building declaration according to EN 15978 Standard
AthenaSMI (2018b) A cradle-to-gate LCA of Canadian Glulam. Canada
AthenaSMI (2018c) A cradle-to-gate LCA of Canadian laminated veneer lumber manufacture (LVL)
AthenaSMI (2018d) A cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of Canadian surfaced dry softwood lumber
AthenaSMI (2018e) A cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment of Candian oriented strand board - OSB
Cabeza L, Rincón L, Vilariño V, Pérez G, Castell A (2014) Life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle energy analysis (LCEA) of buildings and the building sector: A review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 29:394–416
Cabeza LF, Boquera L, Chàfer M, Véreza D (2021) Embodied energy and embodied carbon of structural building materials: worldwide progress and barriers through literature map analysis. Energy Build 231
Cao X, Li X, Zhu Y, Zhang Z (2015) A comparative study of environmental performance between prefabricated and traditional residential buildings in China. J Clean Prod 109:131–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.120
Cho S-H, Chae C-U (2016) A study on life cycle CO2 emissions of low-carbon building in South Korea. Sustainability 8:579
Churkina G et al (2020) Buildings as a global carbon sink. Nat Sustain 3:269–276. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0462-4
CW (2019) Canada wood released china tracking wood project report. https://canadawood.org/canada-wood-released-china-tracking-wood-project-report/. Accessed Dec 22, 2020
Dodoo A, Gustavsson L, Sathre R (2014) Lifecycle carbon implications of conventional and low-energy multi-storey timber building systems. Energy and Buildings 82:194–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2014.06.034
Dong YH, Jaillon L, Chu P, Poon CS (2015) Comparing carbon emissions of precast and cast-in-situ construction methods—a case study of high-rise private building. Construct Build Mater 99:39–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2015.08.145
Drouilles J, Aguacil S, Hoxha E, Jusselme T, Lufkin S, Rey E (2019) Environmental impact assessment of Swiss residential archetypes: a comparison of construction and mobility scenarios. Energ Effi 12:1661–1689. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12053-019-09811-0”
EN-15978 (2011) Sustainability of construction works. Assessment of environmental performance of buildings. Calculation method. BSI, London
Fouquet M et al (2015) Methodological challenges and developments in LCA of low energy buildings: application to biogenic carbon and global warming assessment. Build Environ 90:51–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.03.022
Guo W, Yao T, Zhang S, Tao H, Wang L, Liu Z (2014) Research on calculation method of total carbon emission of light-weight wooden houses (in Chinese). Build Energy Efic 42:73–85
Gustavsson L, Joelsson A, Sathre R (2010) Life cycle primary energy use and carbon emission of an eight-storey wood-framed apartment building. Energy and Buildings 42:230–242
Hafner A, Schäfer S (2017) Comparative LCA study of different timber and mineral buildings and calculation method for substitution factors on building level. J Clean Prod 167:630–642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.08.203
Hildebrandt J, Hagemann N, Thrän D (2017) The contribution of wood-based construction materials for leveraging a low carbon building sector in europe. Sustain Cities Soc 34:405–418
Hosseini MR, Martek I, Zavadskas EK, Aibinu AA, Arashpour M, Chileshe N (2018) Critical Evaluation of off-Site Construction Research: a Scientometric Analysis Automation in Construction 87:235–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2017.12.002
Hoxha E et al (2020) Biogenic Carbon in Buildings: a Critical Overview of LCA Methods Buildings and Cities 1:504–524. https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.46
IEA (2019) Global Status Report for Buildings and Construction 2019. Paris
ISO-14040 (2006) Environmental management – life cycle assessment –principles and framework. CEN(European Committee for Standardisation), Brussels
Lang S (2004) Progress in energy-efficiency standards for residential buildings in China. Energy and Buildings 36:1191–1196
Lasvaux S, Habert G, Peuportier B, Chevalier J (2015) Comparison of generic and product-specific Life Cycle Assessment databases: application to construction materials used in building LCA studies The. Int J Life Cycle Assess 20:1473–1490. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-015-0938-z
Luo W, Mineo K, Matsushita K, Kanzaki M (2018) Consumer willingness to pay for modern wooden structures: a comparison between China and Japan. Forest Policy Econ 91:84–93
Ma M, Cai W (2020) Towards low carbon pathway of the commercial building sector for 2070 Lessons from China. Paper presented at the Applied Energy Symposium 2020: Low carbon cities and urban energy systems
Ma M, Ma X, Cai W, Cai W (2020) Low carbon roadmap of residential building sector in China: Historical mitigation and prospective peak. Appl Energy 273:115247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2020.115247
MoHURD (2017) Standard for design of timber structures GB 50005–2017. China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, China
MoHURD (2019a) Standard for building carbon emission calculation GB 51366–2019. China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, China
MoHURD (2019b) Technical standard for nearly zero energy building GB 51350–2019. China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, China
MoHURD (2019c) Uniform standard for design of civil buildings GB 50352–2019. China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, China
Moncaster AM, Pomponi F, Symons KE, Guthrie PM (2018) Why method matters: temporal, spatial and physical variations in LCA and their impact on choice of structural system. Energy Build 173:389–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2018.05.039
Ramage MH et al (2017) The wood from the trees: the use of timber in construction. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 68:333–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.09.107
Sathre R, Gustavsson L (2009) Using wood products to mitigate climate change: External costs and structural change. Appl Energy 86:251–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2008.04.007
Skullestad JL, Bohne RA, Lohne J (2016) High-rise timber buildings as a climate change mitigation measure – a comparative LCA of structural system alternatives. Energy Procedia 96:112–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2016.09.112
Tae S, Baek C, Shin S (2011) Life cycle CO2 evaluation on reinforced concrete structures with high-strength concrete. Environ Impact Assess Rev 31:253–260
Tan X, Lai H, Gu B, Zeng Y, Li H (2018) Carbon emission and abatement potential outlook in China’s building sector through 2050. Energy Policy 118:429–439
Tan Z (2007) General range and reasonable control method of steel content in reinforced concrete structure (in Chinese). Build Struct 37:17–19
THUBERC (2020) 2020 Annual report on China building energy efficiency. China Architecture & Building Press, Beijing, China
Ürge-Vorsatz D, Khosla R, Bernhardt R, Chan YC, Vérez D, Hu S, Cabeza LF (2020) Advances toward a Net-Zero Global Building Sector Annual Review of Environment and Resources 45:227–269. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-012420045843
Wen R, Qi S, Jrad A (2016) Simulation and assessment of whole life-cycle carbon emission flows from different residential structures. Sustainability 8(8):807. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8080807
Wolf C, Klein D, Weber-Blaschke G, Richter K (2016) Systematic review and meta-analysis of life cycle assessments for wood energy services. J Ind Ecol 20:743–763. https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.12321
Wu H, Yuan Z, Zhang L, BI J (2012) Life cycle energy consumption and CO2 emission of an office building in China. Intern J Life Cycle Assess 17:105–118
Ximenes FA, Grant T (2012) Quantifying the greenhouse benefits of the use of wood products in two popular house designs in Sydney. Australia Intern J Life Cycle Assess 18:891–908. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-012-0533-5
Yan Y (2011) Research on energy consumption and CO2 emission evaluation of buildings in Zhejiang Province. Zhejiang University
Yang X (2017) Analysis on the development trend of modern wood structure building in China (in Chinese). Construct Technol 5:12–15
Yang X (2018) Development trend of prefabricated wood structure building system in China (in Chinese). Construct Technol 5:6–11
Yang X, Zhang S, Xu W (2019) Impact of zero energy buildings on medium-to-long term building energy consumption in China. Energy Policy 129:574–586
You F, Dan H, Haitao Z, Zhen G, Yanhua Z, Benna W, Ye Y (2011) Carbon emissions in the life cycle of urban building system in China—a case study of residential buildings. Ecol Complex 8:201–212
Zhang S, Fu Y, Yang X, Xu W (2021a) Assessment of mid-to-long term energy saving impacts of nearly zero energy building incentive policies in cold region of China. Energy and Buildings 241:110938. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2021.110938
Zhang S, Yang X, Xu W, Fu Y (2021b) Contribution of nearly zero energy buildings standards enforcement to achieve carbon neutral in urban area by 2060 advances in climate change research, Accept
Zhang W, Tan S, Lei Y, Wang S (2013) Life cycle assessment of a single-family residential building in Canada: a case study. Build Simul 7:429–438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-013-0159-y
Zhou N, Khanna N, Feng W, Ke J, Levine M (2018) Scenarios of energy efficiency and CO2 emissions reduction potential in the buildings sector in China to year 2050. Nat Energy. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41560-018-0253-6
Funding
This study was financially supported by the National Key R&D Program of China “Research on Optimal Configuration and Demand Response of Energy Storage Technology in Nearly Zero Energy Community” (2019YFE0193100).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Holger Wallbaum.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yang, X., Zhang, S. & Wang, K. Quantitative study of life cycle carbon emissions from 7 timber buildings in China. Int J Life Cycle Assess 26, 1721–1734 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01960-8
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11367-021-01960-8